Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34534 (JHR)

MANISH SINGH ALIAS MANISH KUMAR SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3628/2025 · 2025-05-05

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:13522] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3628 of 2025 ------ Manish Singh @ Manish Kumar Singh, aged about 32 years, S/o Late Shankar Prasad, R/o 316, Gousala Nala Road, Jugsalai, Near Tatanagar Gousala, P.O. & P.S.- Jugsalai, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... …. Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kr. Trivedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 05-05-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No.82 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No.1092 of 2024 registered under Section 118 (1), 109, 61 (2), 3 (5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, in criminal conspiracy with the co- accused persons, attempted to murder Abhijeet Singh but the bullet instead hit Bunty Rajak. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the injuries sustained by the victim- Bunty Rajak is simple in nature as is evident from para-120 of the case-diary. It is further submitted that the witness Sandeep Singh has categorically stated that it is the co-accused Sunny Singh who fired upon Abhijeet Singh from the pistol. It is next submitted that there is no allegation of firing any shot against the petitioner. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.03.2025 as is evident from para-27 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No.82 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No.1092 of 2024 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/